Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_211852 AI generated

Insolvency practitioner's assumption of pre-insolvency claims does not exempt debtor from judicial stamp tax

Case Number ICCJ_211852
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the Presiding Council of the Cluj Court of Appeal, establishing a mandatory uniform legal interpretation that the involvement of an insolvency practitioner does not exempt a debtor from paying the judicial stamp tax for claims and appeals initiated prior to the opening of insolvency proceedings. This decision resolved a jurisdictional dispute concerning the fiscal status of pre-insolvency litigation, specifically addressing whether the subsequent assumption of a case by a court-appointed insolvency practitioner triggers automatic tax relief. The court held, pursuant to Article 115(1) of Law No. 85/2014 and Articles 32 and 33 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 80/2013, read in conjunction with Articles 197, 470(2)-(3), and 486(2)-(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, that such procedural succession does not invalidate the debtor's original obligation to pay the judicial stamp tax, thereby confirming the taxable nature of these pre-insolvency actions and binding all lower courts to this interpretation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 115 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 85/2014, art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Insolvency practitioner's assumption of pre-insolvency claims does not exempt debtor from judicial stamp tax: This decision resolved a jurisdictional dispute concerning the fiscal status of pre-insolvency litigation, specifically addressing whether the subsequent assumption of a case by a court-appointed insolvency practitioner triggers automatic tax relief. The court held, pursuant to Article 115(1) of Law No. 85/2014 and Articles 32 and 33 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 80/2013, read in conjunction with Articles 197, 470(2)-(3), and 486(2)-(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, that such procedural succession does not invalidate the debtor's original obligation to pay the judicial stamp tax, thereby confirming the taxable nature of these pre-insolvency actions and binding all lower courts to this interpretation.

Keywords

AI generated
insolvency tax procedure fiscal law obligation to pay Civil Procedure Code payment of stamp duty

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 115 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 85/2014
În interpretarea şi aplicarea unitară a dispoziţiilor art. 115 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 85/2014, coroborate cu prevederile art.
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural basis establishing the binding nature of the decision rendered in the interest of the law.
AI generated
ICCJ_212003
Tax liability survival after insolvency practitioner assumes pre-insolvency litigation: strict construction of stamp duty exemption under Insolvency Law Art. 115
Decizia nr. 4083/2013
Judicial stamp duty exemption in insolvency: scope of post-filing exemption under Article 77 of Law No. 85/2006 for claims filed before insolvency proceedings commenced
Decizia nr. 929/2004
Exemption from stamp duty for claims filed by a judicial liquidator under the insolvency law
Decizia nr. 6901/2013
Insolvency practitioner qualification dispute; sufficiency of judicial stamp tax for multiple distinct claims under Law No. 146/1997
Decizia nr. 102/2007
Stamp duty exemption for judicial administrator claims and effect of assignment notification on active procedural standing in insolvency proceedings

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

Procedural basis establishing the binding nature of the decision rendered in the interest of the law.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 2 Dosar nr. 2975/1/2023

Şedinţa din 26 februarie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Curţii de Apel Cluj şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea unitară a dispoziţiilor art. 115 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 85/2014, coroborate cu prevederile art. 32 şi 33 din Ordonanţa de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 80/2013, raportat la dispoziţiile art. 197, art. 470 alin. (2) şi (3), respectiv art. 486 alin. (2) şi (3) din Codul de procedură civilă, în cazul cererilor de chemare în judecată şi al căilor de atac introduse sau declarate de către debitor anterior deschiderii procedurii de insolvenţă, supuse taxei judiciare de timbru, potrivit legii, însușirea cererii de chemare în judecată sau a căii de atac de către practicianul în insolvență desemnat în procedura ulterior declanșată nu atrage scutirea de la plata taxei judiciare de timbru.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 26 februarie 2024.